Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
Sep 18, 2010 6:30pm EDT
our privacy series. we are looking at privacy issues and telecommunications policy. joining us from mount view, california, is yahoo!'s cheap of privacy, anne toth. also with us, juliana grunewald. thank you for being with us from california. what is your job at yahoo!? >> i am the vice president of global policy and the head of privacy at yahoo! that means i work with product teams, marketing, customer care, a work throughout the organization to make sure our policies and privacy promises are embedded throughout policies and products. >> this is what you had to say about yahoo!'s privacy policy. >> is this a new policy that yahoo! has developed, and is it one of the more stringent ones in your world? >> our policies have been in evolution over time. i think our thinking about privacy from the beginning. i have been a guy who for 12 years and i have worked with product people to make sure that privacy is reflected through our products services. that is absolutely nothing new. the way we have been thinking about privacy lately has been about how to contextualize privacy so that it ha
Sep 11, 2010 6:30pm EDT
since then. this is very important to us. >> the tech daily dose editor for the national journal joins us. >> i am told that you're going to be putting out some guidelines in of the fall. could you tell us what they will do, whom they are aimed at, and more specifically, when they might come out? >> these will not be guidelines in terms of being final thinking on these issues. we will release some draft documents to try to figure out where there are points of consensus and agreement. what we are hoping to do is increase transparency. one of the concerns is that most people do not know they are being tracked. second, come up with clear, meaningful ways for consumers to exercise control and choice. third, identify areas that are most critically important, sensitive and affirmation, and uses of the information beyond online behavioral advertising that we have seen already. those are some of the key issues that we are going to address in the guidance that we put out. >> in your testimony on july 22nd you said this, if legislation is enacted, the commission believes that it is important tha
Sep 4, 2010 6:30pm EDT
advertising market suffered -- they're coming back strongly now -- that was not an issue for us. the subscription model continues to work extremely well for us. we also think that, as you look at other screens, the subscription model travels very well. you suddenly hear other entities talking about subscription models. we have been in the business for a long time. all of a sudden, syndication has become a buzzword. cable companies are going to authenticate the fact that you are a subscriber, which allows you to watch the content to get to that cable system on your ipod or your laptop or whatever device. we kind of giggle at that. previously, we have been syndicated. if you ordered showtime back in 1978, there was a filter remove from the cable drop which would allow the showtime to pass through the ocax -- coax into your home. we think our judgment of what is happening is far easier than it would be for others. >> what is your model? >> you may pay your cable operator and get your credit everywhere. as all of the technologies come along, what is our rate structure, what are we going
Sep 25, 2010 6:30pm EDT
necessarily get rid of all cannot change browser settings to get rid of. we would oppose using those for marketing purposes. there might be reasons to use those technologies to deliver something to you like a movie or tv show or game or something that is more interactive, but that is different from collecting information and using it for marketing for offices, and we would oppose the use of persistent technologies for marketing purposes. >> you said that the baucher and stearns draft bill would have a dramatic effect on your industry. can you give more detail about what you do not like and what you do like about your bill? i know that privacy advocates do not think it goes nearly far enough, and it is true -- too industry-friendly. >> we would not describe the bill as industry-friendly. the kinds of things we do not like about it -- we think is much too broad and a lot of the definitions are very broad. there are things that i think everyone would agree have been defined many times over by other laws as personally identifiable useful information, like social security numbers, but the
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4